Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University with specialties in natural resource politics, public opinion, interest groups, political parties, voting and elections. Aside from academic publications, he is author or co-author of three hiking/backpacking guides, and he is past President of the Western Watersheds Project.

“Although Hitler is dead, the theories that he espoused remain alive. With the modern tools being developed by biologists and other scientists, it is important for young people to be made aware that knowledge can be manipulated and turned into tools of destruction.

In every generation, educating the young is an awesome task. Today, with new scientific advances, the rapid spread of knowledge through computer networks, and the ability to alter the material being transmitted, it is more important than ever that students learn to think for themselves. Part of that learning process should include the devastating effects of prejudice. A true understanding of the history of the Holocaust would make that lesson clear”

In recent months, Fish and Game staff have deployed over 800 game cameras in a high-density grid throughout the state, which will take millions of pictures. When Fish and Game staff collect the cameras at the end of September, researchers will download and analyze the photos and apply statistical modeling to estimate the population.

Sifting through millions of photos will be labor intensive, but Fish and Game Wildlife Research Manager Mark Hurley is aiming to early next year have the most robust and accurate count of wolves ever in Idaho, and the first scientific population estimate since 2015.

Very expensive effort, and they still won’t be able to get sufficient geographic coverage even with so many cameras to get an accurate count. And, who is going to make the identifications to identify unique individuals – will they use FBI facial recognition software? Won’t this be a hoot to watch unfold?

Mareks, I have been watching wolf population monitoring in ID since the reintroduction. Even had communications with the then IDFG wolf coordinator Steve Nadeau back in the 1990’s. He told me, with their collaring program at the time, there were no wolves in areas where I had seen them. No wolves were relfected in their annual reports to USFWS at the time. The following year, they acknowleged the re wolves where they thought there were none before. Scat, tracks and kill sites confirmed my assertion, since we had taken pictures and gave them coordinates. Don’t lecture me on wolf ecology, sport.

The above link goes to a scientific report by the LSU veterinary team, (led by Dr. Frank Bastian), that is working on discovering the cause of transmissable spongiform encephalopathy (TSE).

Much of the literature to date assumes that TSE’s are caused specifically by rogue prions. This may not be the case. The LSU team discovered a “Spiroplasma spp.” of organism. These are tiny filterable, wall-less bacteria which the LSU team consistently found to be associated with TSE. This bacteria is even smaller than some viruses and is very difficult to detect. It is quite possible that this bacteria damages normal prion tissue to form abnormal prion protein in this complicated disease process.

Chronic Wasting Disease continues to spread, and as it spreads, the probability of this disease infecting other species of animals and humans increases. It is a very dangerous decision on Trumps part to weaken the USDA and other scientific departments.

It is bad enough to see our beautiful native animals suffer and die but there is still the growing possibility that the livestock industry will be devastated and that more humans will succumb to this stealthy killer.

Our president who acts like a cross between P.T. Barnum and Adolf Hitler and his myopic, die hard cheer leaders in the republican congress, have got to go if we are to survive much longer.

There may be more captive tigers in the US than wild ones in the rest of the world. But in states like Texas that bristle at government interference, no-one really knows how many are being kept as pets.

… Taj is one of as many as 7 000 tigers living in the US either in zoos or privately owned, according to some estimates. That’s nearly double the estimated 3 890 tigers still prowling in the wild around the world.

This is something to be proud of. I just read about one being beaten to death in a rural area, but still – I’m glad to see the population overall is growing and protected, and important for the world to know about:

FYI – FWP ENCOURAGING people to sign up and take advantage of killing wolves in the state of Montana.

“In addition to license and permit requirements, a person must attend and complete a wolf trapping certification class before setting any trap for a wolf in Montana.

Completion of either the Idaho or Montana wolf trapping certification class will be recognized as meeting this requirement. A certificate will be awarded to those completing the Montana trapping certification class”

Because there are those who strongly deny that wolves will attack humans. Doesn’t happen often, probably in many areas where humans interact with wolves. But it does happen and has likely happened throughout human history. Then there are all those events including testing would be prey, and almost attacks that are never reported and won’t show up in any recorded history. My cousin, a truthful guy from what I know, talked about getting an elk last year during archery season and being stalked by a pack of 5-7 wolves for a four mile trip out of the woods with an elk quarter on his back. Go figure.

PS. I know nothing about tigers, and have no skin in the game, so to speak. On the other hand, wolves are in my back yard, and where I hunt. I have no fear of personally being attacked by one or more wolves, by the way. I think the risk is extremely low, and I think common sense and historic data support that conclusion that many others hold.

“Total populations of 50 and 100 wolves are expected to have minor overall impacts on Washington’s ungulate populations. Fifty wolves may kill about 425-630 elk and 700-1,050 deer per year, with annual take doubling for 100 wolves (see Table 13 for an explanation of these estimates). These
levels of predation could result in noticeable effects on elk and deer abundance in some localized areas occupied by wolf packs, but should not have broad-scale impacts. These levels of loss potentially represent 1-2% of the state’s elk population and less than 1% of the combined deer population. With larger populations of wolves, greater numbers of ungulates would be removed annually, with perhaps 1,700-3,800 elk and 2,800-6,300 deer taken if 200-300 wolves became re-established (Table 13).

Populations of 50 to 100 wolves should have few negative effects on big game hunting in Washington, as demonstrated by the relatively small estimated take of ungulates described above (by comparison, Washington hunters kill about 7,900 elk and 38,600 deer annually). As noted elsewhere
(Creel and Winnie 2005, Mao et al. 2005, Proffitt et al. 2009), wolves may also cause some redistribution of game, which could make these species somewhat less vulnerable to hunter harvest.
However, these impacts together would be restricted to the relatively few areas occupied by packs during the early to middle stages of recovery and would probably not reduce statewide harvests of elk and deer by more than 1-3%.

And yet the WA wolf population in 2019, Mareks, is well over the 50-100 used in the WA wolf plan, to show relative impact.

So, how many elk, deer, and of course cows, sheep, dogs, etc. do you suppose the wolf population in WA will take when it closes in on 250-300 in just a couple more years? Officially the 2018 population, according to WDFW is a MINIMUM of 126 individual wolves, 27 packs, and 15 successful breeding pairs. Add another 10-15 percent, plus wolves in Indian Country and we are closer to reality.

“Relative impact” What a joke WM. There are so many impacts on elk, deer, and cattle that far surpass wolves. Hunting, weather, disease, accidents, all cause way more cattle and deer, elk deaths then wolves. Give it a rest.

Connectivity of WA wolves to Canada, ID and OR ensure that. Transplantation in WA is also a part of the wolf management plan, though not done to date.

Cows, well that is a continuing area of conflict with producers exercising their legal right to private property, and public lands, while experiencing increased operating costs absent for many decades.

WM, fair enough about inbreeding, but not enough. All this drama about WA wolves. Mostly it’s about cattle grazing on OUR land. Legal rights? If it’s a RIGHT to graze on OUR land, that RIGHT can be and should be changed.

Ida, that is an excellent question, because the possibility of having too many wolves in too many places was not addressed, to my knowledge, in the NRM reintroduction EIS. Of course, the feds were paying for the planning, management and control mostly with grants, employees and cost-shares, and now the costs have shifted in large part to the states, and will likely shift even more if a national delisting is complete (except the Mexican wolf in AZ and NM).

The pressure to eliminate grazing on public lands as wolf populations increased and greater conflict was perceived with livestock operators was also not part of a full EIS on wolf reintroduction, either. And yet, it is front and center in the hot issues presented today. And, this is why, long ago Ralph postulated that wolf reintroduction is about much more than the survival of the species at levels to meet Endangered Species Act legal objectives.

WM, Ralph posted that because there’s a conflict of interest on OUR public lands. Forest Service lands are supposed to be multiuse, but emphasize grazing and logging way more than ecology. They seem to be operating like it’s the previous century (and maybe even the one before that). Wake up! We are losing numerous species every year. Every endangered species is about more than that one animal, it’s about how that one animal effects the whole. With wolves their effects are obvious to us, but we’re losing bugs that are every bit as crucial.

Wolves on tribal lands ARE included in annual survey – you do not know what you are talking about and have been caught with your pants down again and again and again, lol

“Each year’s population total reflects population losses as well as population gains. WDFW documented 12 mortalities during 2018, including four removed by the department in response to wolf-caused livestock deaths; six legally killed by tribal hunters; and two other human-caused deaths that remained under investigation when this report was prepared.”

“Wolves that inhabit tribal lands in the Eastern Washington recovery area are managed by those specific tribal entities.”

And you forget the dying & dead livestock (from many other causes; weather, respiratory disease, boneyards, calving complications and even injuries from trucking to remote locations) that more often than not, lead to wolf depredation, WM.

Montana has somewhere in the neighborhood of 900 wolves and Livestock losses, from wolves, is about the same as its been for years – minute, given how many cows are on the landscape – and most of the depredation seems to occur over and over on the same ranches or public land grazing allotments. Why do you suppose that is?

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 applies to all eligible federal lands. And then there is FLPMA for BLM. Don’t forget the Forest Service is in the Department of Agriculture – notwithstanding multiple use, they are largely in the business of tree farming, and to some extent livestock interests. BLM, of course, is in Interior, but they too have a resource use loyalty that is part of the persona of the West.

Years ago, when this forum had a broader interest spectrum and drew more learned commentors, we had some pretty good discussions of some of these topics. The dialog community, unfortunately, is smaller now, and maybe not even as experienced or well-educated. I find that sad.

I see some advocacy groups, lead by some outfit out of Maryland(?) just filed suit in Seattle (King County) over the new wolf kill order in NE WA by WDFW under the Commission’s wolf management plan. Haven’t seen the complaint yet. Interesting choice to sue in King rather than Thurston County, the county where the state capitol is and the decisions are made by WDFW administrators. Maybe this is really all about delay, as the state will likely want to move the case to Olympia.

WM, now we’re uneducated? Is that what we do here, insult each other? Yes the FS is tree farming and grazing. Is that really what Americans want? I think if people really knew what these agencies do in their name things would be different. That’s why I post here, many people who don’t post read our words and take heart. Endlessly obsessing about what you perceive as problems with wolves only serves those with economic agendas toward OUR public lands. Is that your goal? Is that your loyalty? Do you really take the side of welfare ranchers who continue to abuse OUR public land?

Hey, you brought up the wolves in India, not me. If you’re going to bring something up here expect others to think critically about it. Your focus on the problems wolves cause makes me wonder why you feel that way. I too have encountered wolves in the wild and they always fled from me quickly. Granted I wasn’t hauling a bloody carcass like your cousin but you’ve told that story here before and like before I must say HE WAS NOT ATTACKED. Yes, attacks happen, but Moose and Bison attacks are way more common. In other countries it’s Hippos or Tigers. Wolf attacks are WAY down on the list of dangerous animals. At the top of that list are: Humans, dogs, Moose, Elk, Bison, Lions, Tigers, and Bears (oh my). My suggestion to you is that if you are that afraid of Wolves avoid where they live. I do the same when I visit L.A.

I read what you wrote but your constant negativity about wolves stems from something, I suggest unrecognized fear.

Wolves do more good for any ecosystem they’re in then all hunters in the same area. Our conquest of Nature continues to cause widespread, unintended problems. Wildlife, better neighbors than many people.

One thing I haven’t seen in this thread between you and WM is any mention of Diamond M Ranch or the powerful McIrvine family. The McIrvines have intentionally set out salt blocks wolf dens to get to increase the likelihood of a wolf/cattle incidence. They know they that the wolves will be killed if they lose a cow.

Wasn’t there a WSU professor who studied wolves who lost his TENURED position over that a few years ago?

The law is on the side of agriculture and the culture of open range cattle. The federal laws work for the ag industry. We can amend laws even though it is near impossible. We need to try. There are too many serious stressors hitting wildlife and habitat. Soon there won’t be much of anything left but humans, cows and cockroaches.

Thanks Yvette. Yes, as was reported here by someone else, there is a professor whose work was shutdown because of his position on wolves. Those are the real heroes, risking career and safety to speak the truth.

Oh heck, Yvette, let’s just go to a direct quote from WDFW on the location of the salt blocks and other deterrent efforts PLEASE READ FOR CONTENT:

-The producer calves outside of occupied wolf areas and cow-calf pairs are trucked to the grazing site. Calving outside occupied wolf areas protects calves when they are first born and most vulnerable to depredation;

-The turnout date for grazing on the U.S. Forest Service allotment is June 1; the producer delayed turnout of the livestock until June 15

-As part of this producer’s business model, cattle are bred early, so calves are generally around 200 lbs. at turnout. Delayed turnout and early calving are considered proactive conflict mitigation measures because the calves are larger and less vulnerable.

-Additionally, deer fawns, elk calves, and moose calves become available as prey in mid-June;

-Removal of sick and/or injured cattle when discovered;

-Since turnout, the cattle have been in three main groups—two around salting sites and one around a watering site. The salting sites are predetermined by the U.S. Forest Service and have been used historically, so even if the salt was removed, the cattle have a strong fidelity to the site and familiarity with the location from salt in the ground.

– Accordingly, WDFW wildlife conflict specialists deployed Fox lights to deter wolves from these areas on June 23;
Between June 17 and July 6, regular patrols of the area were coordinated among the producer (at least four days), the Ferry-Stevens County Wildlife Specialist (four days), and department staff (five days); and

-The department has a contracted range rider who monitors the producer’s cattle. The range rider had been deployed to a different (but adjacent) allotment in the OPT territory. Since the depredation confirmed on July 6, the department redirected the range rider to the grazing area where the depredation took place.

-Although not considered a deterrence measure, the grazing rotation on the allotment this season diverts cattle away from wolf rendezvous sites identified in previous years (per the U.S. Forest Service).

WM, according to your sources cattle with calves were “turned out”, ie. grazing 4 to 5 miles from know wolf den sites. Cattle were grazing 2 weeks later than usual. Other things were done to try to keep wolves away. Yet none of that worked and a few (a very few) cattle were killed(maybe by wolves). The sentence for the wolves was death… Why were calves anywhere near a known wolf den site in an area where wolves had supposedly killed cattle before? It seems like the rancher grazed there despite the wolves. Maybe he had no choice. Did the wolves have a choice? Do the American people have a choice? Maybe the answer is to NOT have cattle grazing there at all! Why is that not an option? Are we so desperate for beef raised at taxpayer expense that we are willing to compromise with an endangered species and all that species represents?

Hiker, that is what the duly adopted WA wolf management plan is all about. It may not be what YOU or some other folks want, but it is how it works, unless a judge says otherwise, or the plan is changed. By the way those aren’t my sources. That comes straight from WDFW. It is pretty clear they believe the producer has done quite a bit. He has a right to run his business. And controlling wolves with lethal means was always part of the plan.

Not to interrupt your conversation with Hiker, WM but I wanted to say at this point, thank goodness for the powers to be (judges) that do take the time to evaluate the facts and aren’t k(c)ow towed in to believing that those that have taken advantage of the land and government subsidies for decades, have any interest in its wildlife or its future health.

WM, those sources may be from WDFW but you posted them to defend your agreement. Besides, when did anyone here trust what the government says? Question it always.
I’m glad you agree that the plan CAN be changed. It seems broken to me so should be changed.

I was reading an interest article on India and dog bites. There are approximately 59,000 human deaths a year in India from dogs infected with rabies. I would be more frighten of dogs than wolves. Plus another 20,000 deaths from snake bite.

“WASHINGTON (AP) — A conservative lawyer and writer who argues for selling off the nation’s public lands is now in charge of a nearly quarter-billion acres in federally held rangeland and other wilderness”

“So, in striving to protect our culture, our religious and spiritual freedoms, our sovereignty and our treaty rights – all of which are encapsulated in the grizzly issue – we are ‘destroying’ Cheney’s idea of the ‘Western way of life’?” questioned Rodgers. “I would remind the Congresswoman that at the time of the Lewis and Clark Expedition an estimated 10,000 grizzly bears roamed from the Missouri River to the Pacific Coast. That was all Indian Country. Now there are fewer than 2,000 grizzly bears and our people live in Third World conditions on meager reservations in the poorest counties in the US. Does she really want to talk about ‘destroying’ a ‘way of life’?” asked Rodgers.

Do they have a cattle drive through Grand Teton every year? I hope it isn’t another Malheur ‘statement’.

And Wyoming’s grizzly hunt:

“Wyoming lawmakers, frustrated with the ruling, authorized the Wyoming Game and Fish Department to shirk the rule of law, and allow the hunting of grizzlies even though they are federally classified as threatened. The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission considered taking that step but decided against it, not wanting to make felons out of its licensed hunters.”

There was a time when shooting the packs happened once every other year in WA (and we were promised that such drastic measures would not happen again by the then F&W Director), but now it seems to have escalated to every year, so something doesn’t seem to be working:

I don’t know what kind of F&W outfit WY has either – going along with defying the ESA about a grizzly hunt? I’m bracing myself for some sort of retaliation and show of force, I hadn’t heard about a cattle drive through Grand Teton. I’m sure guns will be proper attire and required. 🙁

And the state should not be normalizing psychopathy and wanton cruelty.

Wyoming reminds me of a disappointing restaurant review – you know how they say aside from the food, the service and the price, it was great? Wyoming does have a great atmosphere though. 😉

I don’t live in WA, but their wolf plan isn’t that great IMHO. The reason this rancher gets away with all he does on the public lands, and isn’t booted out, is because the public either isn’t aware and/or doesn’t care about wolves getting shot to accommodate this rancher, despite polls and what they say.

I don’t know if other ranchers are as troublesome as this one is, but every year it’s the same – if people truly do want natural wildlife on the landscape, as they say the do.

It appears to me that people are not aware of the cost to themselves as taxpayers, and that WDFW and their collaborators and appeasers just cater to him. Is eating beef really worth it? It isn’t to me.

I thought I might give the new ‘impossible burger’ a try just to support it, but I truly would be happy with the old veggie alternative.

Thanks, I’m just as happy with the original veggie burgers, or things like falafel too.

I want to add that does anyone think that after 8 years, nearly ten years, that anything is going to change for this rancher’s behavior?

The state(s) want to make it acceptable to kill wolves as part of their ‘toolbox’ and other appalling figurative speech that make living creatures sound like inanimate cogs in a business plan, stakeholders, etc. I don’t ever want to see the wasting of wildlife normalized. This guy is on the public lands, and I wish that more public lands ‘stakeholders’ would care.

Historically this rancher has been very uncooperative, so I’m not sure what it is he is doing differently now, and the current articles don’t say. There’s probably old articles for any history, and I think here on this site too.

Yes, amazing she admitted her true feelings. In a way she is right. Those in the Old West habitually trampled over Natives and wiped out wildlife, pushing ecosystems to the brink. It’s too bad there are still supporters of her who wish to place money over health.

surprising from Barrasso and the natural resources committee…could we hope for a pendelum swing? One way to reduce conflicts is to stop killing predators and disrupting their pack structures.

I am always amazed at the extremely low risk that predators pose to humans, compared to dogs, cars even airplane fatalities. Yet the focus on preventing predator conflicts is so out of proportion.

Here on Cape Cod there have been 2 shark attacks in the Truro area. That is in the last hundred years or so….

similar to wolves

Now my beautiful bay beach in Eastham , and many others, host huge shark beware signs. Sharks in the swimming area of the bay…Ive seen three some thirty years ago and they were not great whites. I walk this beach almost every day, I am swimming almost every day and I’ve fished the waters for years (in the past). Never seen a great white in the close to shore bay.

but are you making the connection, Ida? Between the self inflicted despair (over population comes to mind) of our own species and how that despair, affects every other species we share the planet with?

The term melanosomes Is brought up. A melanosome is an organelle found in animal cells and is the site for synthesis, storage and transport of melanin, the most common light-absorbing pigment found in the animal kingdom. Melanosomes are responsible for color and photoprotection in animal cells and tissues.

Interestingly enough, some dinosaur fossils, in particular feathered specimens, some the melanosomes are preserved, thus giving paleontologists a window into dinosaur color.

I’m so thrilled – I’ve got at least two Monarch caterpillars hanging upside down, having bent the stem of a milkweed leaf – so I think they are ready for the cocoon stage! I’ve never seen the entire process from egg to butterfly.

I’ve been running around like a madwoman while aerial spraying is going on, putting up tarps over the milkweed overnight. They don’t seem to mind it. I hope the next challenge of migration they will win also.

They are so gorgeous – you know they are something special when you look at them. It made me think of how many I used to see as a kid in the garden.

I remember walking home From school in early autumn as a child through an open field, memory is not as strong in regard to presence of milkweed but I believe it was abundant. Must have been pathway for migration at the time as there were thousands, if not tens of thousands of Monarchs perched on every available plant.

Interesting as the Daffodils will read this and say the first half is BS, and the second half, see, we told you. If the online rancor is any barometer of the wolf “controversy” ebbing a bit, that’s a good sign. However, over the past couple years many to most online rags have deleted their comment sections.

or the conversation will be we need to kill more cougars by any means necessary in additional kill more wolves because it’s not helping. but,but,but, someone keeps saying that the wolves are killing all the cougars….

Anywhere from 2000 to 3000 lions. JB used to present information in regard to lions nutritional needs being the same as wolves. If there are more lions than wolves, it’s logical to conclude lions kill more elk than do wolves.

Does this mean more in total, because there are more cougars than wolves? Is it a per capita calculaion? And what happened to the hypothesis that black bears (and where present grizzlies) kill more young of the year elk?

Seems there are many more questions to be answered, unless this study in fact addressed them.

The role of predation in ungulate-population dynamics is unclear, largely because these interactions are complex and difficult to study. Among the wildlife biologists, the traditional view is that most predation is compensatory

On the other hand, some recent research suggests that growth rates of prey populations, especially those at low densities, may be limited by predation.

Determining the effect of predators on ungulate populations is difficult
because it is a moving target. Predator-prey interactions occur within a matrix of prey species, and several species of predator are distributed across a diverse landscape with changing habitats. Furthermore, the biology of each species is unique and segments (e.g., neonates, juveniles) of populations respond uniquely to the biological setting (Coulson et al. 1997, 1999). In addition, each segment of a population plays a different role in shaping the dynamics of a particular
population (Gaillard et al. 1998, 2000).
Evaluating the vital rates (e.g., birth rate, survival rates) of ungulate populations is the best way to assess the effect of predation on an ungulate population. Populations are most sensitive to changes in adult-female survival, followed by reproductive rates of prime-aged adults, age at first reproduction and
juvenile survival (Gaillard et al. 1998, Eberhardt 2002)

It means that: (i) wolves and cougars are both obligate carnivores; (ii) cougars, being, on average, being larger than wolves have greater energetic requirements; (iii) there is an order of magnitude more cougars in the West than wolves; and (iv) they prey upon the same animals.

It doesn’t take a logician (nor mathematician) to understand that the collective effects of cougar are much greater than wolves. Shoot, we didn’t really need additional science to show this…but here we are.

In the end it doesn’t matter. The people who want to kill wolves have all the power, so the bounties, trapping and hunting will continue–and it’ll continue to have little effect beyond lining the pockets of the Don Peay’s of the world.

“In the end it doesn’t matter. The people who want to kill wolves have all the power, so the bounties, trapping and hunting will continue–and it’ll continue to have little effect beyond lining the pockets of the Don Peay’s of the world”

“An insider account of the Malheur occupation. From the lead-up to the occupation, through the trials and the aftermath, this will be the defining chronicle of a cultural and political moment we could all do better to understand.” – Source Weekly

State has now killed 25 wolves in the Colville National Forest on behalf of Diamond M Ranch

Only a single wolf of a pack that had nine members at the beginning of July survives. Among the wolves killed were four pups.

Complaints from Len and Bill McIrvin and other members of that family operating the Diamond M Ranch have triggered 87 percent of the state’s wolf killing. The family has declined government payments to compensate them for lost cattle, and refuses to take commonsense measures to protect its cattle from predators. Instead, it has publicly demanded the eradication of wolves from the area.

Robert Wielgus, a former Washington State University wildlife biologist who has studied wolves and other predators in eastern Washington, has pointed out that livestock losses to wolves were one-third of one percent (0.003) in wolf-occupied areas of Washington, except when it comes to the ranching operations of Len McIrvin, who has suffered 14 times the losses of other ranchers in wolf-occupied territory. The state has admitted that McIrvin and his Diamond M Ranch have never used quality range riding services, and in recent weeks they refused to allow the state to send a team of range riders in to protect their cattle. They have made clear that their intent is to kill wolves, not save cattle.

“Complaints from Len and Bill McIrvin and other members of that family operating the Diamond M Ranch have triggered 87 percent of the state’s wolf killing. The family has declined government payments to compensate them for lost cattle, and refuses to take commonsense measures to protect its cattle from predators. Instead, it has publicly demanded the eradication of wolves from the area.”

But since they are using state and taxpayer money to fund wolf ‘removals’ every year, it amounts to government payments! Tens of thousands of dollars.

Let them come up with the money themselves (the inevitable) next year. I’d love to know their yearly financial information, just how hard put upon they have been. My guess is not very.

So, now he’s linked with some moneyed hedge fund manager in a new gig.

Maybe his authorship of this self-published article is accurate, and maybe not. Might be good to wait until the general media picks up the topic, or the Judge hears the facts and applies the law. Judge McHale is a newbie in Settle based King County Superior Court. Let’s see what he does.

So? Are you saying this report is lies? Or are you just trying to cast doubt by referring to the author in a negative way? Is that how we deal with people we disagree with? Is that how you wish to be treated here?
Maybe you could just present your disagreement with some facts about the case and stop with the dispersions.

Wayne Pacelle has kept WGL wolves on the ESA for much longer than MN, WI and MI wanted, because HSUS never wanted them delisted regardless of how many there were and whether there was a scientifically defensible position to delist. I think he’s a scum bag, and he proved it with the many sexual harassment complaints.

I thought there was one left that the court blocked WDFW from shooting? Did they defy the court?

But the tiniest bit of progress has been made; the courts and the media have acknowledged that this single ranch refuses to cooperate with the state wildlife plan, as feeble as it may be, and are responsible for the major amount of wolf killings and taxpayer funding of it.

If I understand correctly, WDFW did not confirm this wolf was a member of the eradicated pack. Sorry, I can’t remember where I read it, but it seemed to come from an official WDFW source. It may or may not been a Togo pack member.

WM, What difference if this sole wolf was part of that pack? Wolves are being slaughtered to “protect” this welfare ranchers cattle. We as taxpayers are footing the bill. This ranchers seems to be openly hostile to wolves. I say enough is enough. What do you say WM? Has this rancher crossed a line or no? Last time I asked if you supported him or not you avoided the question. Comment all you like but tell us where you really stand.

As I understand it this lone wolf might still be subject to a kill order if he is part of the pack, and the Court agrees with WDFW on removal efforts. So, it could make a difference whether this wolf survives or not, yes?

And, if you think about the long game in WA, it is all about the total numbers, range and connectivity. There is a new WA wolf statute that kind of reinforces that, with the high concentration in the NE part of the state and the need to get better distribution at lower concentrations. Protocols or not, there will still be wolf kills. You can count on it. That is the part some advocates just don’t get- it is about the numbers and always will be. They will continue to be killed in ever larger numbers as range expands and greater tolls are taken on elk, deer, moose prey, domestic livestock and domestic animals. Be careful what you wish for, because it means more dead wolves. It is the logical conclusion, and I doubt, there is little to change that. It is a harsh reality of wolf reintroduction or repopulation.

I just thought I’d see what was being said about the ongoing bloodfest in Washington. The McIrvines and their Diamond M Ranch are atrocious. The feds and states treat the welfare ranchers like ranch royalty. This is not about money and loss of cattle. Cattle that are grazing for a whooping $1.35/AUM. This is a culture war.

How many lives are lost or ruined (wolves and wolf researchers) due to the McIrvine welfare ranchers?

Well, here’s the same report from the Houston Chronicle. WDFW claims that Diamond M had taken steps to deter wolves (non-lethal), but yet the court found that they had not done ‘due-diligence’ (non-lethal):

You’re welcome! But where it stands now, I don’t know. The 2nd restraining order was temporary:

“A lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court Aug. 1 by two Seattle residents, with support from the Center for a Humane Economy, sought a temporary restraining order on the lethal removal order. The judge denied that restraining order but then ruled Friday that the state and cattle producers in the area of the wolf pack didn’t perform “due diligence on non-lethal methods.”

Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman Staci Lehman said the agency makes every effort to make a responsible decision after considering available evidence and that they will work with the court.”

I don’t know what working with the court means, or if the restraining order was lifted.

Personally, I don’t like it – but I do realize that human nature being what it is, there will be wolf removals.

But this particular instance just goes over the top, and I do hope that the courts decide that this ranch must comply with the state’s management plan, and not abuse it – and certainly not having the state agency not forthcoming about the abuses and going along with them, even covering for the rancher.

This national forest ought to have wolves in it, and as I and many have said before, loss to wildlife and other reasons is the cost of doing business, and it is minor compared to other risks of doing business.

The arrogance of humans thinking they can clear the landscape of other life so they can make money is wrong. This rancher ought to make some concession, especially on the public lands.

I do hope I understand correctly that the court has found the ranch has not complied, and it appears the WDFW obsequiously saying they will ‘work with the court’ means they have been caught and called out for it. I know they are definitely caught in the middle but it comes off as a little dishonest.

As far as Wayne Pacelle is concerned, he resigned from HSUS, but does that mean he can never do good works for animals? I think that is a little unfair.

Thanks Ida. I choose wolves over cattle. I choose wildlife over destruction. I choose protection over abuse. If my food costs more, so be it. It’s worth the price.
We have the luxury of discussing this because our ancestors wisely set aside lands to NOT develop. Our public lands are our greatest treasure in the West. People come from all over the world to see them. Yet they are treated as a commodity to be abused through extraction. I would rather have this rancher, and all ranchers like him, go out of business, never to bother the wild again. It happens all the time in our modern economy. During the last recession millions lost their homes, yet this guy is protected. Absurd.

we investigated brown bear attacks (n = 664) on humans between 2000 and 2015 across most of the range inhabited by the species: North America (n = 183), Europe (n = 291), and East (n = 190). When the attacks occurred, half of the people were engaged in leisure activities and the main scenario was an encounter with a female with cubs. Attacks have increased significantly over time and were more frequent at high bear and low human population densities. There was no significant difference in the number of attacks between continents or between countries with different hunting practices.

In Scandinavia, the brown bear (Ursus arctos) population increased from ~500 bears in 1977 to ~3300 in 2008, with an increase in injuries, fatalities, and public fear of bear attacks. We reviewed media coverage and interviewed victims to explore how bear population trends, hunter education, and other factors may have influenced the number of injuries and fatalities in Scandinavia from 1977 to 2016. We found 42 incidents with 42 injuries and 2 fatalities; 42 were adult men, one was an adult woman conducting forestry work, and one was a boy skiing off-piste. Thirty-three adult men were hunting bears, moose, or small game, often with a hunting dog, and 26 had shot at the bear at 8±11 m before injury. Eleven nonhunters were conducting forestry work, inspecting a hunting area, picking berries, tending livestock, hiking, harassing a denned bear, and one person was killed outside his house at night. Eight of the 11 incidents of nonhunters involved female bears with cubs; three of these family groups were in dens and two were on carcasses. The annual number of hunters injured/killed was mostly influenced by the increase in the bear population size. The pattern was similar regarding injuries/fatalities to other outdoor users, but the relation with the bear population size was weaker than for hunters, and the null model was equally supported. Bear physiology at denning may make encounters with bears more risky in the fall, when bears show pre-hibernation behavior. Awareness and education efforts, especially among hunters, seem important to ensure human safety. Recreationists and forestry workers should avoid dense vegetation or make noise to warn bears of their presence

“in Estonia there have been cases where people were injured in bear attacks.Most of such cases took palace in hunting situations and involved wounded animals. In the last 10 years three episodes of bear attack and consequent injury have been registered. In one case wounded bear was involved and the attack would not have taken place, as far as the circumstances are known, without the shooting incident.

Fear for bear attack plays a key role in bear conservation.There are eight known cases from Estonia when bears have been shot in self-defence from short distance while four of them were wintering females with cubs. In none of those cases bears had actually attacked people.”

I’ve had decent luck with Monarchs this year in the milkweed patch I have, at leat one died (heartbreaking) but – there was another little, furry caterpillar that I’ve seen quite a few of.

I finally was able to identify them, they’re called the Milkweed Tiger Moth, and they are gorgeous – they look like miniature skunks. They also feed exclusively on milkweed. I had been especially worried about how they’d all fare with the mosquito spraying we’ve had, and they and the bees all seem to have come through okay.

Chris, I think the Federal agencies in charge of these lands might need to support quotas as well. Increased regulation, without increased patrol and law enforcement is useless. I saw this today when I met a mtn. biker in a Wilderness Area near where I live. I mentioned to her that she wasn’t allowed there and she claimed to have forgotten she was in Wilderness, even though she then said she hiked there all the time. In all the time I’ve hiked in this area for the last 5 years, I seen ONE Forest Ranger on the trail! I’ve seen plenty of volunteers, but they can’t make arrests or issue tickets.

The agencies will not until there is real pressure from both environmental groups and public lands users. The problem is both have been captured by the industry and indoctrinated land ethic, that of public lands marketed as righteous anarchistic freedom.

Orgs also rely heavily on industry foundations – like Patagonia and Conservation Alliance – for funding.

Individuals are loathe to believe “low impact” activities have significant impact – and not just in aggregate or carbon to and from jaunts.

Howie Wolke (a guide) supports the SOAR Act. His Wilderness Watch does not strongly campaign today for carrying capacities and quotas. Really, nobody does. If they and those like them don’t, we cannot expect captured agencies and politicians (like OIA’s Colorado) to do so, much less have citation issuing enforcement to ensure flora and fauna can exist in situ.

I wrote about these issues years ago, again singling Wuerthner. I believe he has a role to play in correcting course via his expertise and Public Lands Media.

Chris, my main point is that support for quotas won’t matter unless these agencies reprioritize their budgets to support enforcement. Much of the NFS and BLM budgets are spent on firefighting and thus unavailable. The National Park Service has quotas for backpackers already with staff to support this.
Another thing is your blame for hikers seems simplistic to me. The link you posted about Vail’s elk suffering needs analysis. According to that study elk run in fear from humans, leaving calves behind and this leads to their deaths. However, what is not mentioned is WHY the elk are afraid of humans in Vail. Elk, like most large mammals, adapt to their circumstances, and where they are NOT hunted they are not afraid. I have first-hand experience with this having been chased by female elk protecting their calves. This happens frequently In Yellowstone N.P. where elk are not hunted and are not afraid of humans. I am not advocating against hunting and believe it has it’s place in wildlife management. However, as is usually the case, things are complicated and quotas may or may not help. If they help protect wildlife then I am in favor. I think it could go beyond quotas to include closures, since, like that article states, many would ignore quotas. Maybe limited closures to protect wildlife during birthing season would help. That, along with proper support through law enforcement patrols.

September 1, 2019
My wife and I just returned from a backpacking trip in the Left Fork of Fall Creek. We had read that livestock grazing was banned in this area. We were surprised to find a herd of approximately 20-30 cows. The damage they had done was very apparent. It was really disturbing. We had also read that this was great area to view wildlife. We saw one elk, a few goats and I heard a coyote early in the morning. The wildlife sightings were sparse which I’m sure is due to the cattle mucking up the place. Does anyone know why the cattle are there? A mistake? Was to ban lifted? Who can I talk to to file a complaint? Thanks

Average temperatures in Russia rose at more than double the rate seen worldwide between 1976 and 2018. The year 2018 was the ninth-warmest year in Russia since 1936.

A population of 13.4 million people lived in 46 “highly polluted” Russian cities last year, the report added. Cities across Siberia dominated the ministry’s ranking of the 22 most polluted towns and cities, which are home to an estimated 5.1 million people.

Earth’s clock continues to click forward, educating those, dedicated to environmental sciences and warnings about the dangers ahead….but fact is, way too few humans seem to be listening to or even give a sh*t about what our species is doing to other species we share the planet with.

We Humans have managed to “outsize” Planet Earth in just our brief period of time here due to greed and need for space and no one seems to get that fact yet:

This bears only crime is responding to bait left for another bear. Who knows if it would cause “problems” if left alone.
Imagine stumbling upon the best restaurant in town, only to find at this place they kidnap you and move you to a different neighborhood. Pathetic, no wonder so many bears die each year. Griz need to stay on the LIST forever if this is how they get treated.

And try and imagine you’re a predator, just being a predator, in western states and finding “free” buffets signs hanging from just about every fence post? (many pastures on both private and public lands have these subtle “signs” as in dead or dying livestock laying around) because its too much trouble for ranchers to clean up the by product of raising livestock. (last I heard over 20% of livestock die annually from a whole host of reasons other that predation, which is minute)

What’s 20 percent of a few million head of cows and sheep raised in western states? Nothing obviously to get excited about.

Most write it off. Write those losses off until the diners (predators) get too serious about expecting/looking forward to those free buffets rather than looking for their natural prey, in what’s still a prey rich environment for predators.

Hell, coming home yesterday I could of swerved off the road, slightly, and bagged a nice young calf (as in beef) that was loose on the road. But I don’t eat beef and neither do most predators, unless the opportunity is too good to pass up 🙂

Yes, it seems the agencies responsible look the other way when it comes to ranchers and their trash. If you or I left food out and a bear got it we could be fined, if caught. Ranchers are guilty of leaving food out all the time and yet it’s business as usual. The BLM and NFS have let all of us down.

I think in the last week or two, or I hope anyway, I saw a Monarch emerge, and he or she looked like they were drying their wings, or maybe they had just lit there.

I have a small milkweed patch that came up in a front border, and all of the caterpillars took up residence on the plants close to the garage. I had to move my car so we don’t disturb them. 🙂 The little furball tussock moths have moved in now that the Monarchs I think are nearly ready to go.

The roads are treated in winter, but we’re in/near wetlands and public water supplies so I don’t know if they use sand or less road salt. One is as bad as the other I suppose.

Mtn. Lions in that part of CA face an uphill battle. Surrounded by freeways, cut off from others, and now this. They seem to have little chance of long-term survival. It’s unfortunate because if you spend any time down there you’d realize there are so many miles of undeveloped hills, beautiful Mtn. Lion habitat.

“Getting rid of reporting requirements makes it glaringly obvious that the ministry isn’t even planning on studying whether such an unethical and unscientific regulation change will benefit moose,” said Hannah Barron, director of Wildlife Conservation Campaigns for Earthroots. “Hunters could wind up killing hundreds or even thousands of wolves and coyotes each year and we’d have no idea.”

It’s more than two steps back; it’s all the way back to square one. Primitive. I wonder what kind of a court system they have and if it can be challenged?

The proposed cull was condemned as outdated thinking that ignores the real cause of the caribou decline by a one-time NDP candidate and former conservation officer.
Habitat loss to logging, mining, oil and gas development and roadbuilding is the real problem, said Bryce Casavant, now a conservation policy analyst with Pacific Wild.
“It’s not a scientific discovery to say that if we kill the predators, the caribou will do a little better,” he said. “What’s really happening is that taxpayers are subsidizing inappropriate industrial operations by paying for the cull and the wolves are paying with their lives.”

“The proposed cull was condemned as outdated thinking that ignores the real cause of the caribou decline by a one-time NDP candidate and former conservation officer.
Habitat loss to logging, mining, oil and gas development and roadbuilding is the real problem, said Bryce Casavant, now a conservation policy analyst with Pacific Wild.
“It’s not a scientific discovery to say that if we kill the predators, the caribou will do a little better,” he said. “What’s really happening is that taxpayers are subsidizing inappropriate industrial operations by paying for the cull and the wolves are paying with their lives.”

Short article, but no talk of deer/ moose removal. If there are so few Caribou, and so many wolves, the wolves have to be eating something else to maintain their population level.

Its that time of the year again in Montana where hunters are creeping around in bear habitat. Hunters who’ve done their best to wash away any human scent (from their bodies and clothing) Covered from head to toe in camouflage, hoping to outsmart big game.

Meanwhile thousands of hikers have been traveling the same areas (inside and around the park) during the spring and summer months and one is hard pressed to find any news articles about them being attacked by grizzlies.

Seriously WM? When I was a park ranger in Yellowstone and also in Grand Teton N.P., for 10 years, this would happen every fall. As many as three or four hunters would be attacked by Griz. OUTSIDE the parks. Meanwhile people, including myself, would continue to hike, in the parks, throughout the fall and RARELY even see a bear let alone get attacked by one.

When you combine sneaky people who aren’t making noise with gut piles from successful hunts it’s a recipe for disaster.

Hiker, in the two instant cases, no gut piles. I have been charged by a grizzly – but not as a hunter, in Yukon Territory.

Incidentally, I was in Olympic National Park week before last, up in LaCrosse Basin, headwaters of the Duckabush River and opposite the Quinault, which flows into the Pacific Ocean. Had 16 black bear sightings, likely of 10 different bears. Several within less than 40 yards, including one old cranky boar who we accidentally suprised – and he began a charge which I stopped with hiking poles over my head and a very loud, “NO.” Most of our coastal black bears just want to be left alone, so they can chow down on huckleberries, which were numerous, large and sweet this year.

As for grizzlies, it is in their nature to be aggressive. And, the more bears there are, in more habitat where humans are numerous, the more likely there will be encounters not good for humans and ultimately for grizzlies. Be careful what you wish for outside national parks.

So, WM, what you are saying is that you’ve never been ATTACKED by Griz., only charged. This thread is about Griz. attacks. Thanks for clearing up your limited experience.
BTW I was talking about bear sightings in the Rockies, I sure WA. has more, since it has better habitat. Any attacks by bears, either black or Griz. to report?

HA! Too funny my friend! Comment all you want, say anything you desire, just know I’ll stick to the point. The point here is that hunters got attacked and YOU said they could have been hikers and been attacked as well. My response is that’s a lot less likely then many believe. This is based on years of living and working in Griz. country, not just visiting. When you have Griz. wandering in your backyard it changes your perception.

When hiking in Griz. country follow these guidelines:
-hike in groups, and stay together.
-make noise, especially when you can’t see far down the trail. This alerts bears to your presence so they can avoid you.
-carry (and know how to use) pepper spray.
-if you see a bear from a distance turn around and leave.
-if a bear charges DON’T run, bears can outrun you and most charges are bluffs.
-if a Griz. attacks, play dead. Most Griz. attacks are based on a perceived threat and if the threat I gone (ie. you play dead) the attack usually ends.

Hunters are usually too quiet to alert bears of their presence and increase their chances of attack. Hunters usually are carrying a firearm so the tendency, if attacked, is to shoot, and miss, first, then attempt to use pepper spray (too late). Hikers, if they are careful, can avoid the vast majority of these problems. Let’s not confuse the issue and maybe we can keep people safe.

Well, Hiker, having spent a fair amount of time in Alaska I will just have to disagree with you, along with many other hikers, fishers and hunters there and elsewhere in grizzly shared habitat. When I stream fished in AK where the sound of the rushing water impaired a grizzly’s ability to hear me while feeding on summer salmon, locals INSISTED I take 12 gauge short barrel shotgun (before bear spray which has become more popular recently).
My cousin was a professional engineer/land surveyor, and for some of his career worked for the USFS on the Lolo NF in Montana; He also worked specifically in areas abutting the Bob Marshall Wilderness. He and his crews were not silent, in fact anything but, and they had several grizzly encounters over the years.
And if you look at the fatality statistics, serious reported injuries, and talk to folks about unreported “charges or attacks” (I would say a charge is still an attack until it isn’t), there are quite a few involving, campers, residents on their own property, fishermen, runners, mountain bikers and workers like survey or timber marking crews. So let me just call bullshit on your NP Jellystone “expertise,” and a possible (likely) over-focus on hunters.
And, a point of order on the term “Griz.” My friends tell me that term is earned, and you don’t get to legitimately use it unless you have been “attacked” and blood is drawn. Too bad Bob “action” Jackson, or SEAK Mossback (an AK fish biologist in grizzly country all the time and experiences to show for it), and even mauled grizzly scientist Barry Gilbert don’t comment here anymore. They would put you and me in our proper places, Hiker. They do have the experience, in spades, not like some know it all GS-4 or 5, seasonal NP ranger telling tourists what grizzlies do and when, or making some subtle distinction between a bluff charge and the real thing.

WM, interesting. So you complain about what I post then post this utter nonsense. What do you know about anything? Lots of crap you’ve heard from friends. How about info from trained professionals? Do you have any of that? Before you start dissing the NPS just know it’s a constant battle to keep those “tourists” safe.
I do NOT have an anti-hunting bias, some of my best friends hunt. But facts are facts, WAY more attacks (very different from charges if you’ve seen the injuries) involve hunters than hikers.
Maybe things are different in AK. but down here, WHERE MOST OF US LIVE, what I’ve outlined works to keep people safe and alive. This is not my opinion, it’s what experts in the field teach to us lowly grunts in the field in the NPS. I have more than just work experience with bears. When you work for the NPS you live there. Instead of just visiting Griz. country like you have. Try living there for over a decade before you make fun of my experience. I was not kidding about Griz. in my backyard.
You sound like you’ve got a lot of hunting experience, well I’ve got a lot of hiking experience. Both on my own and leading others. Including leading backpack trips of several days with many people(through bear country). And what I’ve been trained and taught WORKS most of the time. Obviously there are many variables in nature so when you list things like noise from a stream you are really scrapping the bottom for things to write.
Also, I’ll call them Griz. if I feel like it. You can tell your friends or whoever to stick their self-righteous noses somewhere else.

BTW WM, I’ve talked to thousands of visitors about bears over the years. I have many bear stories that I’ve shared over and over. I’ve spoken to groups of 200 or more at time. All based on proven experts in the field and what they think is most important to share with people. Do you think as a NPS Ranger I just get to make stuff up? Hell no! All talks and walks are audited by supervisors and believe me if something is wrong you’ll find out. So don’t be so quick to judge just because you disagree with me. What you just wrote is distressing for this website, instead of arguing with me you attack me. Well keep it up, I WILL fight back.

These encounters are concerning, and I know we sometimes complain about F&W and their counterparts, but in the British Columbia article you can really appreciate that F&W is the buffer protecting wildlife.

I understand people’s concerns, but I hope it won’t turn into torch and pitchfork response. It is ‘normal’ for bears to be in their habitat too – they were there before human settlement.

With hunters, perhaps the bears have learned to expect danger. I don’t think scent can be eliminated entirely.

I’ve recently had the displeasure to encounter someone who graced/disgraced the pages of The Wildlife News in the past in regard to wolf culls in British Columbia, and other areas of Canada in order to try and save the Boreal Woodland Caribou. Perhaps someone can assist me in understanding the opposing view when every scholarly article, paper and study out there points out Boreal woodland caribou require large, intact forest ecosystems to survive and thrive. The ultimate cause of caribou decline across the country is habitat loss and fragmentation associated with industrial resource extraction activities and the increase in predation triggered by these disturbances. Boreal woodland caribou have lost more than half of their historic distribution area, and the federal recovery strategy identified that 37 of 51 populations are not self-sustaining.

If one wants to save boreal woodland caribou, killing wolves is merely a bandaid for an arterial wound. If the habitat continues to be fragmented, woodland caribou are doomed, and it doesn’t matter how many wolves are killed, because more will continue to be attracted by the moose that filter into areas that were once of low productivity, the old growth niche in which these caribou thrived.

If one looks upon it as work, It’s always been stressed to me, don’t do a half-assed job. In the case of the boreal woodland caribou, this may require a wolf cull (I get this). But it also requires complete habitat restoration, no activity for perpetuity by the extractive industries, no more roads, seismic lines, no snowmobiles for the general public. The habitat is not home to moose and deer, thus wolf predation was low. Now that moose are present due to habitat fragmentation wolf numbers increase due to moose, and the predation rates increase on caribou. With the number of wolves present in those areas, they have to be eating something else beside caribou to sustain their numbers.

So, in regard to saving the caribou, moose also require removal. May the gods forbid the arrival of whitetail deer that carry brainworm.

Immer, sometimes it’s not logical, I find that emotion often plays a huge part concerning wolves (along with other topics). You can argue with someone like that till your blue in the face and achieve nothing. For some reason wolves bring out the worst in some people. The best you can hope for is shutting them down with facts and science. But I doubt you’ll change their minds.

Some people just want to blame and kill wolves. It’s easier than thinking.

Still operating on the almost defunct now, Windows 7 operating system, Hiker, so couldn’t watch the video on this site but I’m sure it was amazing. Grizzlies are nothing to mess around with in their natural habitat.

And as I mentioned in my original post, human hunters may have to start rethinking their usual hunting habits, because there has now been yet another attack on a hunter in the same area.

The “jury” (officials investigating) is still out as to whether it was the same bear, but 8 miles away is well within this bear’s territory.

Yes, hunting in Griz. country is very risky. It sounds like he had hunting partners he was able to reunite with but why separate at all? Even while hunting (maybe especially while hunting), in Griz. country it’s important to stay together! Hunters have died from this! These guys have been lucky to escape with just injuries.

I wish they wouldn’t refer to hunters being ‘attacked’ by grizzlies. If you go out into the wild, it is a risk you accept, and should take personal responsibility for.

The grizzlies and other wildlife are the ones being attacked, especially for recreational killing. I am not a supporter of hunting, especially in modern times where it is not a necessity, except possibly in the most rare of cases.

I just heard this on the national news – it was again called an ‘attack’.

It must be the modern human’s disconnect from nature. Why do people insist upon getting to close? It is the fall rut now, and the bulls are going to be more aggressive. It isn’t that difficult to understand, is it?

From the animal’s point of view, the people are a threat and harassment, or even attacks by hunters and tourists.

What is wrong with people? To entitled as the lords of the land, I guess.

Ida, in my experience as a park ranger many people who visit these areas don’t have a lot of common sense when it comes to wildlife. I once had a photographer argue with me while on duty. I was trying to get people away from a bull Elk who was bugling during the rut and this man said he was a hunter and I was overreacting. Never mind that he was in a N.P. with no firearm dealing with an animal that wasn’t afraid of him because it didn’t get hunted there. I, the uniformed park ranger, was wrong in his opinion. That was an interesting day and luckily the bull eventually moved away. It always amazed me how tolerant many animals were of us, but you never knew for sure what would happen. I really don’t miss that part of the job.

Except for the last few questions JB, which IMHO, got a little too deep and maybe political? in trying to pull out someone’s thoughts, without them being able to clarify, in written words? Their choices?

I responded, in writing, because I could, beyond their obvious “strongly agree or strongly disagree” (no other choices allowed ) questions to their survey, before mailing it back, as to why the past 3 years of Trump and his ilk, have set this country back a few decades (not only environmentally) but how we care about each other as human beings.

“I will be shutting down the page in two weeks. We have done what we could do to stop the spread of wolves, but we have found that the amount of effort to keep the page running does not reflect the interest in actually stopping it. RMEF and others continue to fundraise, and steal our hard work and we will no longer give them our efforts.

“This is going to sound like a right wing conspiracy theory, but the introduction of the wolves is a long term plan to get our guns by liberals. They believe that if there’s no animals to hunt there will be no need for sportsman to have guns”

The reason I say this is this rogues gallery of wolf haters has been active for years.

It’s strange that they would suddenly give up preaching. I have always been concerned that they are responsible for unexplained wolf deaths, poisonings and poachings. No, I am not a Pollyanna when it comes to this stuff.

Devastating news. These Griz. were hit by cars or train while feeding on cattle killed by the snowstorms. If the average person left food out that a Griz. got they could be sited but ranchers routinely leave “food”, in the form of dead cattle, and the bears pay the price. End all welfare ranching now.

“Today, the Tongass is home to approximately 70,000 people spread among 32 communities, including approximately 32,000 in the state capital of Juneau. The region is often referred to as the “Inside Passage” or the gateway to Alaska, and is defined by its primary industries with commercial fishing, tourism and recreation jobs among the fastest growing job sectors in Southeast Alaska. These industries pump approximately $1 billion apiece into Southeast Alaska’s economy annually”

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01678/full -here is another article I came across about empathy. Have long time interest in empathy and how that trait, in my mind at least, has a survival quality both for the individual and population (not necessarily restricted just to the human population). People with empathy driven personalities I think can recognize empathy in other life forms where those that lack empathy see the same thing as “instinctive behavior”. I do not see empathy having any detrimental effect on survival. To the individual it promotes cohesiveness, attraction, learned sharing, protection and so many other survival necessities. The population as a whole benefits as well. Among “wolf lovers” there must be some spark of admiration about wolves that come from the empathy characteristics exhibited by wolves that first turns our attention toward wanting to know more about them. Generally we don’t feel as strongly about fish, is it that we don’t observe their empathy characteristics as easily as with a pack of wolves? Fish do exhibit some level of empathy because we know the young huddle together and must share some mutual benefit, is it any level of empathy? The above research paper points out that empathy does not need a higher level of psychological functions. (So how does science explain Trump’s lack of empathy, he lacks a higher level of psychological function so that’s not the reason- sidebar thought please excuse) For me I conclude that empathy enables the mind to see in broader and more complete terms. Whether it be in a wolf pack that raising of the pups be accepted by all adult members or in peoplekind where empathy brings to the individual to be able to see the value in many more types of people and other life forms. Show me a hunter that says he loves the animals he hunts and hangs on his wall and I say his house of empathy is made from paper. But until those with a desire to expand their empathy do not outnumber those lacking empathy our laws will not reflect this most important survival attribute. Probably most here have seen the photos of the polar bear and chained sled dog playing together and showing complete submissiveness back and forth. No way can I make myself see just instinctive behavior there. Our greatest teacher for survival is all the earth and its life forms. Killing it all off is killing our own.

As a wolf lover, my feelings have come from their cruel persecution over the centuries, and it saddens me to think that this mistreatment of them, based on lack of knowledge and/or mistaken beliefs/superstition, still exists out there.

“The population as a whole benefits as well.”
Is that just a statement of “well, that’s wonderful” or are you doing some non-darwinistic “good of the species” thinking. Being useful to those who share genes with you can benefit those selfish genes though. (Wolves kill each other allot. Not that empathic it seems.) Being that useful to unrelated people is something I only do because of my (atheist) ethics. My tribe is everyone. It may not help my survival or my genes – so what.

Your “show me a hunter” sentence is baloney. I don’t even get “made from paper” or that it has any logic. Just name calling. I shot the fouth deer Saturday – they are overwhelming our place up north, and our managers will allow me god-knows-how may doe tags hoping we can knock them down. Perhaps it is my empathy for the other wildlife that the deer are crowding out that helps me kill deer. Also, they taste good if you have skills, and it is easier to buy no farm animal meat. Further consider that we likely have hunting instinct. Some of us can have that instinct, eat well, get outdoors, reduce deer numbers, and still nearly worship nature. I want to live life having known what is like to be a human. I feel incredibly connected to the old ones when I have that bow in my hands. Same with gardening or foraging.

Your posts are among the best of regulars on TWN. You point out my flaws when I ramble. I wrote the above when frustrated with so many news reports of senseless killing and destruction by people. I cannot see people exhibiting empathy using snares, poison, traps, habitat destruction and trophy hunting having much of a grasp on empathy. I don’t think one must tie empathy to religion to see value it has for humanity and subsequently to the wellness of life on earth for all. So an atheistic viewpoint should not be a hinderance to empathy. I have seen people and animals suffer and die needlessly when a person lacking any vestiges of empathy act. I have tried to learn to ask a question of myself about some of my actions: Do I really need to clear that piece of ground or let it go native; set out traps to avoid dealing with wildlife called pests, you can (maybe) see my point. Do I consider, “is my action all about me? Or do I think about the impact on others?” Killing wildlife just became it is in my way is not executing to our full potential as intelligent humans.

Time and time again, I see this kind of ‘indignance’ from hunters, who conveniently dismiss all of the vile behavior of their fellows, in favor of the ‘ethical hunter in touch with nature and his fellow man’ image.

I can appreciate some of what rork believes, but we know that there are those who are just plain killers who waste these animals (maybe it is a part of the human makeup, the killing instinct, but I disavow it, personally). In modern times, very few kill for food and don’t need to, so all that’s left is that instinct.

How did the deer become so ‘overpopulated’ to begin with? Because there are no predators anymore, except for the human kind.

Ida-
People of this country are losing their quality of life by the taking of ecosystems along with its inclusive wildlife. This is done by the rich and powerful in the form of corporations and businesses. I further think it represents selfishness which is of course the opposite of empathy. Our flag should be flown with the banner, “Kindness Matters”, because it does. Without empathy the enemy is us.

I think the parasitation of ecosystems is done by everyone, with few exceptions. Sure, rich corporations swallow up land and resources, but without consumers they wouldn’t be able to. Rural people because they’ve always done it and can’t seem to comprehend that times change, and resources dwindle to nothing.

The entitled rich, the entitled poor, and in today’s world where wildlife is under such pressure from all sides, it is going to result in extinction.

I do agree that kindness matters, and you do see the results of it many times, but I haven’t the patience anymore with environmental matters, and my empathy includes all living things. Like land and resources, people will use it all up.

^^forgot to add – the entitled rich, the entitled poor, all political parties, and on and on.

We might get a bone thrown to environmentalists occasionally by the Democrats, but that’s it.

I read the other day that California’s governor refuses to block development in fire-prone areas, because it is ‘contrary to California’s pioneering spirit’.

Well, California’s pioneering spirit went out in the 1800s or so. Lord help the forests out there, if people have no intention of stopping building, despite year after year of disasters and expense of life and resources.

I did not mean to dismiss vile behavior of other hunters. Most of them are selfish pigs even if they are law abiding and do no truly horrible things. Many act like trophy hunters and think of it as a competition. They butcher badly or not at all, are wasteful, and are horrible cooks, which might explain why they don’t like deer meat that much. They use bullets from small shacks overlooking bait piles (illegal now near me) – methods requiring no traditional skills and little effort. They don’t even scout, excepting use of trail cameras. They have never experienced anything else. My partners and I do not even consider it hunting, and two generations ago everyone would have agreed.

Regarding the polar bear and the dog chained up, I have a little background info on that whole situation. This occurred up in Churchill, Manitoba, which is popularly known as the “PB Capitol of the world” due to tourism. The owner of the dogs was named Brian Ladoon (he passed away last year). He bred his dogs, the Canadian Eskimo Dog, to sell and supposedly “preserve” the breed. In his compounds outside of town he would have dozens of the dogs chained up and the chains were spiked into the ground. Very few had any shelter at all. I visited his property while up in Churchill working with my wife 15 years ago (she was studying the Hudson Bay PBs and their diet). My wife considered buying one of his dogs to use on her research project with the PBs. She settled on a Dutch Shepherd who turned out to be incredible! (Just google “Quinoa and polar bears” and you’ll see photos of him & my wife and 2 NY Times articles).

Ladoon would go out to the dogs every few days and throw out some food for them. When he didn’t have enough food for them he would pick the ones he thought he could sell and just shoot the others. Now, during the summer the PBs come into Churchill and the surrounding areas because the ice in Hudson Bay breaks up and melts. Ladoon would actually lose several dogs every year because the PBs would kill and eat them. He’d also lose some dogs to wolves attacking them. Ladoon used to leave food about a 1/2 mile away from the dogs to keep the PBs away from his dogs, which got him in trouble. He was a vile person.

Sorry for the diatribe, but my point is that the extremely rare instances where PBs did not kill and eat the dogs and seemed to be playing and socializing with them were more likely anomalies; rather than some mystical display of empathy, affection or love between the 2 species.

MAD,
Doggone, seems like there is always a down side to a good story! Just have to hope the dog and polar bear got to live a full life in spite of bad conduct of people. I enjoy watching my feeders and how different species interact. Hummers/LBJs/squirrels/chipmunks/rabbits/the occasional Coopers hawk/ and my cocker, all communicate to one and other. Hummers are the funniest and are very acute they don’t miss a cue from anyone else although they seem to be too busy staying airborne don’t try to step into their space. My favorite authors on wildlife communication and related topics are Marc Bekoff and Jane Goodall. Also “A Wolf Called Romeo” by Jans Nick. It also ends with human malfeasance. When I have had enough of the Trump war on the earth I pick up a book from these authors.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/michigan-house-votes-to-ok-deer-baiting-during-hunting-season/ar-AAJUyxz
Several other places for that. House trying to overturn our deer baiting ban instituted by our DNR and NRC. There’s one Republican quoted who is not going for it, which was refreshing. I advocate no baiting anywhere, and serious reduction in deer densities, though that will be economically bad in the short term, and most hunters don’t like lower densities, cause they don’t really care that much about deer or the land (plants, other animals, farmers), and/or are blind to the environmental costs.

* One of the first things in the entire bill is a definition of Active Management.

* It codifies a collaborative group of decisionmakers dominated by ranchers (6 of 13) and gives 6 spots to a combination of conservation orgs & rec interests, equating the two. 8 of 13 must reside in the area, ceeding to local control & rendering BLM DMs/Field Mgrs almost moot.

* Mechanical treatment (chainsaws;dozers) are authorized for ‘first responders’ and chemicals are allowed for invasive species in wilderness & scenic river corridor.

* Road setbacks (clearing) of 300′ from centerline.

* Directs 3 loop roads be developed along with “Travel Oregon,” codifying motor based industrial tourism, later a management plan likely to include formal campgrounds. (https://traveloregon.com/) The collection of fees/tolls is authorized. Travel Oregon is directed to develop a marketing plan.

“Seven wolf deaths were recorded among park wolves in 2018. Of those, three were shot by hunters outside the park’s boundary. The most well-known was 926F, a female wolf killed by a hunter near the small community of Silver Gate near the Northeast Entrance. That legal harvest prompted an outpouring of anger at the hunter, drawing national attention.”

Let me further ask the question that if wolf-on-wolf attacks are the biggest cause of wolf death (followed closely by human-on-wolf attacks, I am sure) – isn’t his evidence of the ability of wolves to self-manage their own populations, and they do not need the ‘assistance’ of humans? This would seem nature’s way? There was also a mention of a male wolf being rough with some pups and there was loss there. No need for human ‘judgement’, because we can’t even manage our own behavior.

“The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, a government agency based in Los Altos and funded by property taxes, owns 65,000 acres — an area twice the size of San Francisco — across San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.”

“But officials at the Midpeninsula district say grazing is an important tool to reduce fire risk by keeping grass and vegetation in check. They also say it helps support agriculture — a politically influential constituency in rural Santa Clara and San Mateo counties.”

George? Here they go again. 🙁

“The ranchers pay $14.58 per month in rent for each cow and calf pair that they run on the district’s open space preserves. That’s among the lowest rate of any local parks or open space agency in the Bay Area.”

It’s the small, incremental evidence such as this, that tell us something is coming on. Add all the seemingly insignificant phenomena together, back up and look at the whole, what is transpiring becomes as evident as the subject of impressionist art.

These repeated accidents are sad, and it’s just that in today’s world, we can put a gun in anyone’s hands and outfit them, and they can call themselves a hunter – a budding psychopath, someone without any experience, or inept.

I’m not a hunting supporter, but I will say that before modern times, it was a lot ‘purer’ – not corrupted by money such as everything is today.

Even those who claim hunting for meat is healthier are under delusion, I think – there’s very little on earth that hasn’t been affected by chemicals of human activities, whether lead, herbicides and pesticides, PCBs, and you don’t know what that poor animal has been subjected to.

“Hunters in Wyoming killed 457 black bears in 2018, according to the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game didn’t have that information immediately available on Monday.”

Doesn’t that number just boggle the mind? And that’s just Wyoming, not NJ, PA and elsewhere (I don’t think FL has a black bear season anymore). Idaho hasn’t divulged their number of black bear kills yet.

“EHD is not new to Iowa. The disease claims some deer every year, but large-scale population losses at the county level or larger are rare. The last large-scale losses were reported in 2012 and 2013 in eastern and southern Iowa”

So one has to ask, might the disease be more prevalent out there now because there are so many more “boys with toys” out there impacting the balance of nature? Killing natural predators for the sport of it?

Was just up in the White Mountains near Greer the weekend of 11/16 – 11/17. Had a very fortunate encounter with the 8 member Prime Canyon Pack. Was actually heading out, in the early a.m., to an area where I have seen lobos in the past and they happened to be in that location. Probably the easiest piece of wolf watching I have ever experienced.

They were not happy that I showed up, as they moved off about 100 yards, turned and howled and barked at me for a period of time. I was damn lucky to be in the right spot at the right time.

🙂 Pack of maybe 4? joyously howling early one morning, over on the ranch across from me (2 years ago) and then a lone wolf howled and barked, just a few yards away from my cabin, on the hillside, responding to their howls.

Yep, magical moments to some of us that appreciate wild life, unless you’re a rancher with 500 to a 1,000 head of cattle, spread out all over the landscape here, with poor fencing, little supervision and dead cattle; who’ve died from an assortment of reasons (other than depredation) who are also left scattered around that same landscape……..

Taken together, the incidents were powerful evidence that a resurgent wolf population in the U.P. had become habituated and aggressive toward humans, strengthening calls among farmers, hunters and some lawmakers to drop gray wolves from the list of endangered animals protected by federal law.

There was just one problem: None of these harrowing accounts turned out to be true.

No wolf sped past Brad Johnson to attack a calf on the Dykstra farm. No wolves were seen prowling near preschoolers at recess in Ironwood. And no pack congregated on the back deck of a local home.

Officials at the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and some lawmakers opposed to wolf protection policies were found to have embroidered, misstated or outright fictionalized the threat that gray wolves posed to humans.

The sounds of nature are as special as the views of nature. Around my place nothing can bring a humble feeling quicker than to sit quietly and listen. Sometimes during the day, and sometimes at night. From the noisy explosion of mourning dove wings the other day at my sunflower feeder to the great horned’s repetitive who, who’s at night. The loud yelling of the piliated just before he silently glides in for suet and the coyotes exciting call of a kill are stark notices that I do share this space with those that really count. With my hearing aids tuned properly I can sit close to my feeders and listen to the chickadees, nuthatches and juncos direct traffic at the busy feeders. In this time of the spread of environmental ignorance disease I am thankful that I can recognize joy from watching and listening to my neighbors. May I never know their silence.

Nicely said! Sometimes they are so quick for me when I am out birdwatching, I have to rely on sound to identify them almost as much as sight! Until I get disrupted a plane overhead, a motorcycle or heavy equipment trucks, or a leafblower!

At night I love to hear the owls, barred owl (who, who cooks for you?) mostly where I am, but I think I’ve heard a Great Horned Owl too. Foxes and coyotes.

“Unfurling banners with slogans like “Nobody wins. Yale and Harvard are complicit in climate injustice,” protesters from both schools called on the universities to divest their multi-million dollar endowments from fossil fuels companies, as well as companies that hold Puerto Rican debt”

Well that would make this group substantially more informed than the nation as a whole — roughly 37% can name their congressperson. I don’t see how that makes them ‘clueless’? The most success we’ve witnessed with environmental legislation occurred in the 60s and 70s–largely in response to social protest.

While today’s college kids can’t relate to what a land line phone is let alone relate to a classic comedy episode on TV like Mash, Timz, as SB use to say (and FYI – I miss his insight and input) “get off you high horse” and realize many of those kids AREN”T clueless and are doing what they can,in positive ways, despite what you might think 🙂

I went to college in the 70’s and went back for more in 2003. The kids in college then were nothing like in the 70’s. Many of them had no idea why they were even there other than mom and dad were paying for it and told them to go. So Nancy, running onto a football field during a game and sitting down for an hour is your idea of a positive thing?

I can see it now. Because of their bold move climate change will cease, we’ll have world peace and they will stop killing wolves in the northwest. Who knows, maybe we will even get free speech on campuses again.

In the 90’s, marching on the Capitol, protesting for humane treatment of animals:

“Researchers say the number of animals used in research has come down in recent years, but it’s not clear whether this can be traced to pressure from the animal rights movement. Dr. Alan Goldberg, director of the Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing at the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, says in vitro (non-animal) testing has been an integral part of scientific research for decades. He maintains that the alternatives that have been developed in the last 10–15 years more than likely would have come about without any push from the animal rights movement.

On the other hand, he says, “the public awareness that has occurred – like the forming of my center [in 1981]—is directly related to the animal activists’ activities.”

“if your comparing today’s college kid with kids of the sixties and seventies as equals you too are clueless”

So a member of the generation that has got to ‘have its cake and eat it too’ (e.g., nearly free college, a booming economy when they were young, health insurance without premiums, solvent medicare and medicade, strong unions, etc.) and holds the majority of the nation’s wealth looks down on the current generation as ‘entitled’.

I don’t want to get into a protracted keyboard battle about this but –

Well, the thing is, to me, is that it is naïve at best and hypocritical at worst. I’d like to see them start by giving up or cutting down on fossil fuel use themselves and on an individual level by everyone. Without a big effort from all, this kind of protest doesn’t stand a prayer. It may be a starting point, but it’s quite late in the game.

People of the 60’s and 70’s did bring about great change in civil rights, feminism, helped to create the environmental and wildlife protection laws that are being degraded today, ended a war, even transparency of government activities. These are battles that have already been fought, but do need to be maintained. As far as the economy, there were a lot less people then.

They are still attending Harvard and Yale, because they want the prestige an Ivy League degree will bring them. What are alternative investments?

“When it comes to math, U.S. high school students are falling further behind their international counterparts, according to results released Tuesday of an ongoing study that compares academic achievement in 73 countries. And the news is not much better in reading and science literacy, where U.S. high schoolers have not gained any ground and continue to trail students in a slew of developed countries around the globe.”

Timz, I’m not positive but I think that those protesters from Yale and Harvard might be above the average for all those topics.
The problems with high school usually involve our wonderful public school system. I’m willing to bet, once again, that none of these protesters went to public school anytime in their lives.

So now your argument your argument is the kids at Harvard and Yale won’t be able to fix climate change (yeah, let’s put it all on them) because US high-schoolers, on the average, are falling behind other post-industrial nations?

Hmm… You know what? I don’t even think I need to point out the flaws in that argument.

Wow Timz, maybe you could provide a little context to this video. Otherwise I would say you are just as bad as those “defending the system.” After watching this I concluded that the students didn’t want that guy taking their picture. But I have no idea why or what the backstory is. Just posting this video and making accusations does NOT help your argument. Try some logic instead of slinging mud.
Also I find it interesting that you have a problem with our education system yet went to college twice. Maybe it’s everyone else’s education system that’s broken, not yours.

By all means, we should certainly criticize a system that’s failing — but we should understand why it’s failing (see below). You should also understand that the problems of primary and secondary schools differ from the problems of Universities.

But you’re attempting to change the topic. So again — I don’t see what reduction in the relative (between country) educational achievement among high school-aged kids has to do with the potential of Harvard and Yale students (who are by all accounts, well above average) to address climate change? Seems like you just needed to vent at a younger generation who does things differently from how you would?

—–

“This article tests the hypothesis that national differences in academic achievement scores of 15-year-olds in 25 developed nations in 2003, 2006, and 2009 can be explained by national differences in national health and family economic security programs, levels of parental education, and national differences in motivation to strive for high levels of academic achievement. We also test for the additional impact, if any, of national differences in educational system characteristics. We then ask what variables account for the low scores of American students on math, science, and reading achievement tests. More highly developed national family health and economic security programs and higher student levels of motivation for academic achievement in other rich countries help explain why scores in the United States are relatively low. Low academic qualifications and prestige for teachers and a lack of national educational goals also differentiate the United States from nations with higher achievement scores.”

I taught in a high achieving academic town, and resided in a town that would be considered low achieving. The difference was parent involvement (at times over-involvement) in the education of their children. By the time the students arrived in high school, the kids raised by involved parents were years ahead of of the kids from under-involved parents.
I believe the road of meritocracy leans heavily in favor of students with involved parents.

Socioeconomics also has much to do (not everything, but much) with student success. Child from well-to-do parents wants to go to paleontology camp over the summer, he/she goes, whereas the low income parents might not even know of the opportunities of paleontology camp, not be able to afford it, or not even know the meaning of paleontology.

Also, comparing students here to those elsewhere is tough as an oft used country is Finland, which has a largely homogenous population, and is about the size of California. Also, California’s population of ~ 37.3 million dwarfs Finland’s population of ~ 5.6 million.

I don’t want to oversimplify his message, but Professor Downey implies the problem starts very early– if you come from a disadvantaged background, you’re likely to underperform. I think that comports with what you were saying, Immer?

When you control for poverty rates between nations, the US is right in line with all our peer nations. The US poverty rate is generally significantly higher and this jives with the comment about parent involvement.

In Germany, France, England, gas costs over $5.50/gal. This works better than asking people to be virtuous or having car fleet standards.
I want carbon taxes (CO2 equivalent taxes to be precise). We could extend those to land-use effects too. It would be punishing for feed lots that don’t have digesters, and currently pay nothing for their methane dumping.

Right. And the reason we won’t let gas (or energy, generally) prices get that high is because income disparity in the US is so great that poor people couldn’t afford it — the same reason we subsidize the hell out of food. (Taxing things we all need is regressive –it disproportionately hurts people with lower incomes).

Yes, we have to figure out how to offset that. I’m sure you know there are several plans and even more possible plans for how to do that – it is not impossible. The taxes would create a big chunk of money, and we’d have to funnel it to poor people (or equally to every person some think – just so nobody can complain and redistribute wealth by separate legislation).
I’d redistribute wealth in other ways that have nothing to do with carbon or gas or land use, just cause of what my goals are for the young people. I feel it my responsibility to try and help lift them up. All of them. I’m willing to pay for it. And I am willing to have the very rich pay even more for it than I do. They are a small minority.

I was the third brother of five
Doing whatever I had to do to survive
I’m not saying what I did was all right
Trying to break out of the ghetto was a day-to-day fight

Been down so long, getting up didn’t cross my mind
But I knew there was a better way of life that I was just trying to find
You don’t know what you’ll do until you’re put under pressure
Across 110th Street is a hell of a tester

Across 110th Street
Pimps trying to catch a woman that’s weak
Across 110th Street
Pushers won’t let the junkie go free
Across 110th Street
Woman trying to catch a trick on the street, ooh, baby
Across 110th Street
You can find it all in the street

Ooh, ooh-ooh-ooh, ooh-ooh-ooh, oh-oh-oh

I got one more thing I’d like to talk to y’all about right now

Hey, brother, there’s a better way out
Snorting that coke, shooting that dope, man, you’re copping out
Take my advice, it’s either live or die
You got to be strong if you want to survive

The family on the upper side of town
Would catch hell without a ghetto around
In every city you’ll find the same thing going down
Harlem is the capital of every ghetto town
Help me sing it

Across 110th Street
Pimps trying to catch a woman that’s weak
Across 110th Street
Pushers won’t let the junkie go free
Oh, across 110th Street
A woman trying to catch a trick on the street, ooh, baby
Across 110th Street
You can find it all
In the street
Yes, you can

Oh, look around you, look around you
Look around you, look around you
Yeah
Yeah

Oregon only has 137 wolves anyway. I’ll have to read their plan to see what the kill threshold is. Doesn’t sound like there will be much wiggle room, unless their Democratic governor make up a new law. I wonder if it can be challenged again on scientific grounds. The wolf advocates will be watching and waiting. 🙁

“Core forests are disappearing because a tsunami of new roads, dams, power lines, pipelines and other infrastructure is rapidly slicing into the world’s last wild places, opening them up like a flayed fish to deforestation, fragmentation, poaching and other destructive activities”

If I am reading USDA maps correctly, Michigan has less feral hogs than we did in 2011. And it’s really quite few. We have advantages here – we outlawed people having “wild” type pigs (difficult legislation to write), we have very liberal laws about shooting them, and we have a high density of people willing and able to shoot them (about 600,000 deer hunters). What I’d like to know is how feral they are lately, or if they are more often just recent escapes. Having pigs with wild boar traits escape is probably very bad, and they are hard to keep fenced – make them illegal.
Here’s a copy of one of the maps: https://mucc.org/field-feral-swine-michigan-issue/

Awwww, nice video. You can see that the coyote trotting along the urban street is wary, his ears are flattened back, in dog language. The park ranger here does a good job, and has the patience of Job.

The ones I am lucky enough to briefly see never pay any attention to me. Sadly, they are usually on the run. I hear them though. And it is true that I haven’t seen or heard foxes in awhile. I thought maybe people had ‘removed’ the foxes, but maybe not. I live in a rural area, which is fast changing over the 30 years I have lived here. 🙁

Ever wonder why the NPS kills bears? Just watch these videos. Everyone involved is helping kill this bear. It’s obvious this bear has gotten food from cars and is looking for more. Don’t be surprised if the next video is of someone outside their car feeding this bear, then you’ll hear it’s been killed. This puts the NPS in a tight spot. They don’t want to kill bears. But they really don’t want to explain to someone why their child has been injured.
In this situation the best thing they could do would be to NOT STOP THEIR CAR! They are breaking the law.

^^To me, that’s more argument that wolf populations do not need to be managed or interfered with by humans. People and their activities are fatal to them, no matter their good intentions, it seems. What a shame.

I hope those two pups will be added into the yearly mortality numbers.

“Meanwhile, Trump has appointed his son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner to oversee and speed up completion of the border wall. The president has asked for frequent updates. He reportedly told aides earlier this year, just “take the land.”

wow, what a terrible time we are experiencing under this nasty Trump regime. With all the catastrophic fires and weather events some insane people still deny climate change. and many of them head up our federal agencies. Ugly

Calendar

Quote

‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."